Skip to article frontmatterSkip to article content
Site not loading correctly?

This may be due to an incorrect BASE_URL configuration. See the MyST Documentation for reference.

Comparing urban methods

Map comparison is a complicated process, as there are many tools and approaches. In this project, we are comparing two methdologies for quantifying urban, both of which produce multiple binary rasters of urban areas:

Degree of Urbanization

Urban areaMin Pop DensityMin Settlement Pop
Urban areas300 people/km25000 people
High density urban areas1500 people/km250000 people

Dartboard

Urban areaDefinition
Urban areascontiguous pixels for which the density is above the 95th percentile of the counterfactual
Corescontiguous pixels within urban areas that are above the 95th percentile of the counterfactual within the urban core
Citiesurban areas that have a core

Any attempt to compare these methods has to start with a question of what do we compare: the DoU method produces two layers, and the DB method produces three. After investigating the data it is clear that the DoU urban area is equivalent to the DB urban areas. However, the comparison of the DoU high density to the DB could be to either the Cores or the cities. In the figures below you can see the comparison to both, however, let’s look at the nature of the comparison:

The code to compare the data can be found here (LINK FORTHCOMING), for both comparisons, we use the table below to define agreement

DB Core/CityDB Urban AreaDB Rural
DoU High DensityHigh DensityDisagree UrbanDisagree Rural
DoU Urban AreaDisagree UrbanUrbanDisagree Rural
DoU RuralDisagree RuralDisagree RuralRural

Kenya comparison

Using these categories the maps below were created to compare the DB classes. Based on these results we will focus on the comparison of the DB cores to DoU high density areas.

DB Cores - Nairobi
DB Cities - Nairobi
DB Cores
DB Cities
Nairobi zoom: comparing DB cores to DoU high density areas

Nairobi zoom: comparing DB cores to DoU high density areas